Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Henry v. Cook, 938 P.2d 91.

50 citing documents.

Derek D. Fraser v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Derek D. Fraser v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
(“[T]he party who obtains partial success is entitled to recover all taxable costs.”).
Morales v. Morales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Morales v. Morales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Shastri v. Patel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Shastri v. Patel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
(“the party who obtains partial success is entitled to recover” all costs).
High Stakes v. Garver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
High Stakes v. Garver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
§ 12- 341.01, the superior court “may consider the portion of fees that contributed to the prevailing party’s success.” (emphasis added).
Lopez v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Lopez v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Coronado v. Coronado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Coronado v. Coronado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Whisenand v. Whisenand Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Whisenand v. Whisenand Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
(“[I]n the absence of a statute or rule authorizing apportionment, the party who obtains partial success is entitled to recover all taxable costs.”).
Ryan v. Rubalcaba Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Ryan v. Rubalcaba Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
(under § 12-341, “the party who obtains partial success is entitled to recover” costs).
Emp v. Prieto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Emp v. Prieto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
(“[A] party who succeeds on less than all claims is sufficiently successful to recover costs under the statute.”).
Shepherd v. Costco 441 P.3d 989 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Shepherd v. Costco 441 P.3d 989 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Hosp., –94 (1985) (stating fees may be awarded where appellant has obtained reversal of an order central to the case or final determination of a significant issue of law, which determination on appeal forms a separate unit within the overall litigation); (stating interpretation of “successful party” should be uniform for fees and costs).
Jacobs v. Mihcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jacobs v. Mihcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Singh v. Malhotra Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Singh v. Malhotra Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
(reversed upon certain claims on appeal, but not remanded, with a determined successful party); (explaining that the 19 The parties agree on this much.
Whiles v. Henderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Whiles v. Henderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
(“[A] party who succeeds on less than all claims is sufficiently successful to recover costs under the statute.”).
US Bank, N.A. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 398 P.3d 118 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
US Bank, N.A. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 398 P.3d 118 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
("[A] party who succeeds on less than all claims is sufficiently successful to recover costs under the statute.").
Tucson Lot 4, LLC v. Sunquest Information Systems, Inc. 385 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Tucson Lot 4, LLC v. Sunquest Information Systems, Inc. 385 P.3d 426 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Opinion of the Court 343, (attorney fees on appeal “can be apportioned between successful and unsuccessful efforts” but costs cannot be apportioned).
Tucson Estates Property Owners Association, Inc. v. McGovern, Sines 366 P.3d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Tucson Estates Property Owners Association, Inc. v. McGovern, Sines 366 P.3d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
monroe/pirtle v. Gagan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
monroe/pirtle v. Gagan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
§ 12-341; –44, –93 (App. 1996) (holding that “a party who succeeds on less than all claims is sufficiently successful to recover costs”).
Branigan v. Fredrickson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Branigan v. Fredrickson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
(appellant who obtained partial success entitled to recover all taxable costs).
Beaver v. American Family Mutual Insurance 324 P.3d 870 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Beaver v. American Family Mutual Insurance 324 P.3d 870 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
(appellant who obtained partial success entitled to recover all taxable costs).
Summers Group, Inc. v. Tempe Mechanical, LLC 299 P.3d 743 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Summers Group, Inc. v. Tempe Mechanical, LLC 299 P.3d 743 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Stagecoach Trails MHC, L.L.C. v. City of Benson 278 P.3d 314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Stagecoach Trails MHC, L.L.C. v. City of Benson 278 P.3d 314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
§ 12-341; , (party who succeeds on some, albeit fewer than all, claims "sufficiently successful” to recover all allowable costs); , (party obtaining partial success entitled to all taxable costs).
Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C. 269 P.3d 678 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Best Choice Fund, LLC v. Low & Childers, P.C. 269 P.3d 678 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
(holding that party obtaining partial success on appeal is entitled to recover all taxable costs).
Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C. 261 P.3d 784 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C. 261 P.3d 784 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
44 n. 1, , 93 n. 1 (App.1996); see also Ocean W. Contractors, Inc. v. Halec Constr.
Hunt v. Richardson 163 P.3d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Hunt v. Richardson 163 P.3d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Paloma Investment Ltd. Partnership v. Jenkins 978 P.2d 110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Paloma Investment Ltd. Partnership v. Jenkins 978 P.2d 110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by